MI Civil Rights Commission Seeks Public Input

LGBT Groups Request Clarified Interpretation of Elliott-Larsen

BY BTL STAFF

Equality Michigan on Monday asked the Michigan Civil Rights Commission to issue an interpretive statement to clarify that the prohibition against sex discrimination in the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act includes protection against discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation.

In their request, EQMI pointed out that there is a lack of clarity in current law that leaves both employers and employees, landlords and tenants, and a host of others unsure of what state civil rights law covers. If accepted, it would clarify the ambiguity that exists surrounding the scope of sex discrimination currently prohibited by the ELCRA and bring Michigan law into alignment with the growing body of understanding from federal judges and legal scholars.

In order to ensure that it is considering all points of view, the Commission has asked the Michigan Department of Civil Rights to solicit public input. Now through close of business on Aug. 15, the Department will accept public comments on the EQMI request at MCRC-Comments@michigan.gov. The Commission will address the request at their Sept. 18 meeting in Lansing.

"All hardworking people should be treated fairly and equally by the laws of our state," said Stephanie White, executive director at EQMI. "Most employers want to do the right thing, and many have been pro-equality leaders in Michigan, but there will always be a few people who only do what's right when the law clearly requires it. This interpretative statement will provide that clarity to all Michiganders."

Unlike 18 other states, Michigan does not currently have a law that explicitly prohibits anti-LGBT discrimination in employment, housing, or public accommodations. In addition, although the federal prohibition on sex discrimination in employment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has been interpreted to encompass discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, many LGBT people in Michigan do not receive the benefit of this prohibition, because they work for employers with fewer than 15 employees, the threshold for Title VII coverage.

According to EQMI, the interpretative statement being requested would make it clear that anti-LGBT discrimination is unlawful in Michigan, clarifying the legal responsibilities of employers and individuals and giving notice to victims of discrimination that there are remedies available.

"The Michigan Civil Rights Commission has already issued a report concluding that anti- LGBT discrimination 'exists and is significant' in Michigan," noted Nathan Triplett, director of public policy and political action at EQMI. "The Commission has the legal authority and, in light of their own factual conclusions, the moral responsibly to act on anti-LGBT discrimination."

In a press release, EQMI states if the Commission grants the coalition's request, it will be an important incremental step toward protecting LGBT Michiganders from discrimination. At the same time, the organizations are agreed that the interpretation alone is not a substitute for legislative action to amend the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act.